Family Vote To Figure Heavily In The Battle For White House

COMMENTARY

Try this bit of political word association. If you hear the words ``pro- family`` or ``family values,`` which major political party springs to mind? And why?

Whether you named the Republicans or the Democrats, consider this: Did you choose that party because it has actually done something for a family or families close to you or because it talks a good game? Or do we even expect concrete support for families from our political system?

Political professionals expect the amorphous area known as ``family issues`` to figure heavily in next year`s presidential sweepstakes. Since the baby-boomers will be between the ages of 24 and 42, many observers figure the way to the electorate`s heart is through its home life.

And dramatic changes have rippled through that family structure in recent years, as we all know. Fewer than one in 10 families now fits the ``traditional`` mold of the single male breadwinner and his housewife.

Half of all mothers with children under 6 years old work outside the home. About 20 pecent of all American children will live in a home headed by a single woman at some point in their lives. Things look more grimmer at the low end of the socio-economic scale: Half of all black children will live in a single-parent home; most persistently poor families are female headed.

These trends, of course, have various causes, and suggest different kinds of responses. But while liberals and conservatives tend to push conflicting approaches they are all now seeking at least one thing in common -- the right to the label ``pro-family.``

The left-right fight over the family is not really new. The current struggle seems to have its roots in the failed attempt to pass the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s and early 1980s. Liberals and feminists backing the ERA were shocked to uncover such a vociferous opposition in Middle America to what had seemed in the capital to be a timely, sensible proposal.

After passing the House and Senate handily, the ERA was stymied by conservative activists at the state level. The anti-ERA forces were overwhelmingly female and they and their leader, Phyllis Schlafly, have since exercised their ``pro-family`` agitation in the fight against abortion rights.

Meanwhile, liberal groups have attempted to counter the new right`s fire with fire. Unfortunately, liberals` tactics have until recently virtually conceded the pro-family ground to their opponents.

The most prominent and egregious example has been the National Organization of Women (NOW), America`s (and the world`s) largest feminist group. Under former president Eleanor Smeal, NOW focused almost exclusively on the ERA and abortion rights, while issues like day care, unionization and parental leave suffered.

In its last two elections, NOW has splint into a Smeal faction and a fraction supported by NOW founder Betty Friedan, author of ``The Second Stage,`` which argued for a broadening of the feminist agenda, But NOW`s new president, Molly Yard, has pledged to follow in Smeal`s footsteps.

Democratic politicians, however, are much more eager to regain the family banner. If you listened to the first debate among the party`s announced presidential candidates you heard a lot of talk about children, parents and families.

On the substantive side, Colorado Democratic Rep. Patricia Schroeder`s Parental and Medical Leave bill represents one of the most direct challenges to conservative and Republican pro-family rhetoric. New Right and business groups have already lined up against such ``government interference.``

That`s always the rub, in fact. Ethel Klein, a political science professor at Columbia University, recently predicted to a New York Times reporter that if conservatives retain their near-monopoly on family issues, ``it will be on the privacy issue.``

Conservatives, in other words, continually voice concern for families but resist government meddling -- even something as benign as unpaid job leave. The Democrats, together with groups like the splendid Children`s Defense Fund, are developing serious policies for the real families of the 1990s. The 1988 electorate will have its chance to decide whether preaching or policy is more in order.